[Politics] Opposition runs the risk of being left without bread if it rejects the non-violent usurpation

[FNX Magokiler]

One of the most controversial points that generated the veto presented by the Executive against the Usurpation Law was the gradual nature of penalties, in particular, with respect to the seizure of land or homes that were carried out without violence. The original wording established that any crime of usurpation would be punished with prison, however, La Moneda included in the veto a gradual formula: a judge will be the one who evaluates case by case and establishes whether the infraction has a custodial consequence or, is satisfied with a fine. For the opposition to be able to print its original wording in the law, it needs the Government's proposal to fall, which is already complicated, and also requires 2/3 of the Chamber for the initial proposal to be maintained. If neither of the two is achieved, the articles may end up lawless and, in that case, current legislation prevails, which directly establishes that non-violent usurpation has the penalty only of a fine.

As soon as the veto of the Usurpation Law was made public – on Friday, September 29 – the opposition came out en masse to criticize the proposed measures. Although there are 14 observations contained in the veto, the focus of controversy has been that the Government proposes establishing a gradual range of penalties for the crime of non-violent usurpation, ranging from a fine to a prison sentence. The recently passed law only contemplated the second, and that change is the one that has generated the most criticism from the opposition.

 

 

However, if they reject this point – as they comment with reservation –, they run the risk of being left without any innovative wording and, therefore, the current regulations would operate: non-violent usurpation is penalized with a fine.

While the Government's measure was being processed, Apruebo Dignidad commented on their apprehensions regarding the wording of the Usurpation Law recently passed by Congress. And the document established prison sentences, to the lowest degree, for all types of usurpations: violent – with violence on things – and non-violent.

Finally, the Executive presented a veto in which “a modification is made to the penalties that were planned to make them gradual. Regarding the usurpation that is carried out with violence and intimidation, the penalty proposed by Parliament is left as it was, which is a minor prison sentence in its medium to maximum degree,” explained the Minister of the Interior, Carolina Tohá.

“In the case of peaceful usurpation, where there is no violence or intimidation of people and there is no violence in things, (…) what is established is that the judge will define whether there is a prison sentence, which in this case It would be minor imprisonment in its minimum degree, or there is a fine,” added the minister.

 

https://www.elmostrador.cl/noticias/pais/2023/10/03/sin-pan-ni-pedazo-asi-se-arriesga-a-quedar-la-oposicion-si-rechaza-la-usurpacion-no-violenta/